See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/336927563

EFFECT OF INFILL TYPE AND DENSITY ON TENSILE PROPERTIES OF PLA

MATERIAL FOR FDM PROCESS

Article · October 2019

DOI: 10.2507/30th.daaam.proceedings.074

CITATIONS READS

0 2,337

3 authors:

Adi Pandžić Damir Hodzic

University of Sarajevo University of Sarajevo
8 PUBLICATIONS   3 CITATIONS    16 PUBLICATIONS   13 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Aleksa Milovanović
University of Belgrade
11 PUBLICATIONS   6 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Structural Integrity and Reliability of Advanced Materials obtained through additive Manufacturing (SIRAMM) View project

Integrity Assessment of Power Plant Boilers - TE Kakanj View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Adi Pandžić on 02 November 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 30TH DAAAM INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON INTELLIGENT MANUFACTURING AND AUTOMATION

DOI: 10.2507/30th.daaam.proceedings.xxx

EFFECT OF INFILL TYPE AND DENSITY ON TENSILE PROPERTIES

OF PLA MATERIAL FOR FDM PROCESS

Adi Pandzic, Damir Hodzic & Aleksa Milovanovic

This Publication has to be referred as: Katalinic, B[ranko]; Park, H[ong] S[eok] & Smith, M[ark] (2019). Title of
Paper, Proceedings of the 30th DAAAM International Symposium, pp.xxxx-xxxx, B. Katalinic (Ed.), Published by
DAAAM International, ISBN 978-3-902734-xx-x, ISSN 1726-9679, Vienna, Austria
DOI: 10.2507/30th.daaam.proceedings.xxx

Abstract

Fused deposition modeling (FDM) is a rapidly growing additive manufacturing technology for various applications in
field of engineering. Mechanical properties of 3D printed materials in FDM technology depend on various parameters.
Literature suggests that type and density of infill are parameters that affecting the mechanical properties of 3D printed
materials, and also have direct influence on 3D printing time and amount of 3D printed material. In this paper influence
of infill type and density on tensile properties, 3D printing time and amount of 3D printed material will be investigated
and presented. Total of 13 different types of infill and for every type it will be tested 9 specimens with different infill
density from 10% to 90%. Every specimen would be 3D printed of PLA material with same colour and 3D printing
parameters, also at the same position on printer bed to maximally reduce influence of other factors on mechanical
properties of material. The obtained results would give us a wider picture of how to maximally save on 3D printing time
and amount of material consumed in the production, but to still keep required tensile properties.

Keywords: Material; Infill; PLA; FDM; 3D Print

1. Introduction

Additive Manufacturing (AM), known as 3D print, is a group of technologies and processes that produce objects from
a CAD model by adding layers of material bottom-up. AM is used in the manufacturing of prototypes (Rapid Prototyping),
tools (Rapid Tooling) and final functional parts (Rapid Manufacturing). These technologies provide the ability to produce
complex product geometries without the need of complex tooling. AM is gaining importance in the industry 4.0, and
producing parts via this method offers many advantages over traditional manufacturing technologies [1], [2], [3]:
• Manufacturing of parts with high customization;
• Fabrication of a complex shapes from large variety of materials;
• Low cost and easy application;
• Great reduction in overall product development;
• On-demand manufacturing;
• High potential to approach zero waste manufacturing material compared to conventional subtractive
technologies.
 30TH DAAAM INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON INTELLIGENT MANUFACTURING AND AUTOMATION

The additive manufacturing technology is widely used in engineering for customized products, functional models,
pre-surgical models and conceptual models. This technology finds its application in many fields of engineering and
industry, such as automotive products (companies like Ford and Volkswagen), aircraft, dental restorations, medical
implants (prosthetics, bionics, orthotics) and more. Today, designers and production engineers face the challenge of
producing products faster than ever to meet customer requirements and fulfil their expectations [4], [5].
The increased use of 3D printing as a learning tool and to generate functional end-use parts in industry have generated
need for a better understanding of the mechanical behaviour of 3D printed parts and the development of analytical tools
and design guidelines for engineers. Materials testing of 3D printed plastics was performed in order to provide both
industrial and academic communities with new to improve mechanical and digital design in the context of additive
manufacturing; specifically fused deposition modelling (FDM) [6].
There are many different AM technologies today, and one of the more representative AM technology is FDM, layer-
forming technology by extrusion of wire-shaped materials. The FDM process is also known as “Material Extrusion” or
FFF (Fused Filament Fabrication) process. First step in FDM process is to create STL file from 3D CAD model, and then
in slicer software (eg Ultimaker Cura) create G-code with 3D printing parameters for 3D printer. The process of 3D
printing with FDM technology consists of pushing a thermoplastic filament using and extruder element into a fusion
chamber, known as a hotend. Then is heated to a semi-liquid state by heater block, in head of the printer, and pressed
through the nozzle to build plate (printing bed). After the entire layer is applied, the pad is reduced by the thickness of
the layer in the vertical axis and the gradual deposition continues again until the full product is formed. Shematic model
of FDM process is presented on Fig 1 [2], [7], [8].

Fig. 1. Shematic model of FDM process (1-nozzle, 2-building material, 3-print bed) [2], [9]

Mechanical properties, tolerances and quality of finished product by FDM process depends on many parameters and
factors. Software for preparing 3D CAD model for 3D printing, known as “slicers”, allowing us to change many printing
parameters that will affect on mechanical properties of product material (Fig 2). These parameters include printing
temperature, build direction, raster orientation, layer height, extrusion width, infill pattern, infill density, number of shells,
distance between nozzle and build plate, etc. Beside those parameters, there are also influence of environment factors
(temperature, humidity) and material properties before printing [10], [11], [12].
From literature review, it is clear that infill pattern and density have direct influence on mechanical properties of
material. Also, it is known that 3D printing companies through updates of their slicer softwares (eg. Ultimaker Cura) give
their users to select new infill pattern, but without much details about their influence on final product. Ultimakers 3D
Printing slicer “Cura” today have 13 different infill patterns.
As it is already mentioned, one of the benefits of FDM technology is large variety of materials. Today we have many
different FDM material manufacturers, and most of them are thermoplastics, but there are also reinforced thermoplastics
with carbon or fiberglass. There are many materials for FDM today on market, and some of them are PLA (polylactic
Acid), ABS (Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene), PET (Polyethylene Terephthalate), nylon, PC (Polycarbonate), PEI
(Polyetherimide, Ultem 9085) and more others. PLA became a popular FDM material, and thus also became a research
topic of this paper.
Aim of this paper is to investigate the influence of infill pattern and density on mechanical properties of PLA material.
Also, as known, infill pattern and density have influence on 3D printing time and amount of spent material (weight of
product) and with this it have direct influence on product cost. In further work, total of 13 different infill patterns will be
tested, and for every pattern we will test 9 different infill density (from 10% to 90%). As filament, PLA material will be
used with the same colour and from same manufacturer.
 30TH DAAAM INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON INTELLIGENT MANUFACTURING AND AUTOMATION

Fig. 2. Parameters that influence on strength of FDM 3D printed material [13]

2. Experimental research and methodology

This paper aims to examine the impact of infill pattern and density on mechanical properties of PLA material, also to
analyse influence on printing time and costs. PLA material is chosen from manufacturer 3D Republika and diameter of
filament wire is 2,85mm, a standard size for Ultimaker 2+ 3D printer. A dogbone-type specimen was chosen for the tests
due to the simplicity of sample preparation and its suitability for FDM preparation. 3D model of dogbone-type specimen,
according to ISO 527-2, was designed in Solidworks, also 3D model in STL format is prepared (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3. Dogbone-type specimen according to ISO 527-2

A series of specimens were produced using an Ultimaker 2+ FDM 3D printer. Regarding the software and printing
configurations, the toolpath calculation (G-code) was made with the Ultimaker’s software Cura, version 4.0.0. Printing
parameters were set by selecting the predefined “Normal” profile provided by the Cura. Methodology of preparing 3D
model and 3D printing specimens is presented in Fig. 4.

Material Selection 3D Design 3D Printing

•3D Republika •Solidworks •Ultimaker 2+

•PLA •CAD model •Cura 4.0.0.
•Diameter •STL format
2,85mm

Fig. 4. Methodology of preparing 3D model and 3D printing specimens

 30TH DAAAM INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON INTELLIGENT MANUFACTURING AND AUTOMATION

Main selected 3D printing parameters (predefined for normal profile) like nozzle diameter, layer height, infill density,
wall thickness, print speed, printing and build plate temperature, and PLA material properties by manufacturer are
presented in table 1.

Main 3D printing parameters PLA material properties by manufacturer

Description Value Description Typical value
Nozzle diameter 0,4 mm Filament (wire) diameter 2,85 mm
Tensile Strength at Yield
Layer height 0,15 mm 70 MPa
(MPa)
Wall thickness 0,7 mm Strain at yield 5%
Infill density 100 % Strain at break 2%
Print speed 60 mm/s E-Modulus 3120 MPa
Impact strength - Charpy
Printing temperature 200 ˚C 3,4 kJ/m2
method 23˚C
Build plate temperature 60 ˚C Printing temperature 205 ± 10 ˚C
Line width 0,35 mm Melting temperature 115 ± 35 ˚C

Table 1. Main 3D printing parameters and PLA material properties by manufacturer

In this study, for experiment, specimens in 13 different infill patterns are printed, and for every pattern the infill density
changed from 10 % do 100 %. In the following table, all types of infill patterns are listed and displayed. Also, for each
infill pattern and density, the time of 3D printing and the amount of material consumed per specimen are presented.

Infill type Grid

Infill denisty 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
3D Printing time [min] 46 49 52 55 57 60 62 64 66 93
Approx material [g] 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 10 11 12
Infill type Lines
Infill denisty 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
3D Printing time [min] 46 49 52 55 57 60 62 65 67 93
Approx material [g] 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 10 11 12
Infill type Triangles
Infill denisty 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
3D Printing time [min] 46 49 52 55 57 60 62 65 68 93
Approx material [g] 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 10 11 12
Infill type Tri-Hexagon
Infill denisty 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
3D Printing time [min] 46 49 51 54 56 59 62 64 67 93
Approx material [g] 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 10 11 12
Infill type Cubic
Infill denisty 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
3D Printing time [min] 46 49 52 54 57 59 62 65 67 93
Approx material [g] 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 10 11 12
Infill type Cubic Subdivision
Infill denisty 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
3D Printing time [min] 46 48 50 52 54 56 59 61 62 93
Approx material [g] 6 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 10 12
Infill type Octet
Infill denisty 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
3D Printing time [min] 46 49 52 54 57 60 62 64 67 93
Approx material [g] 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 10 11 12
Infill type Quarter Cubic
Infill denisty 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
3D Printing time [min] 46 49 52 55 57 60 62 64 67 93
Approx material [g] 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 10 11 12
Infill type Concentric
 30TH DAAAM INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON INTELLIGENT MANUFACTURING AND AUTOMATION

Infill denisty 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
3D Printing time [min] 45 47 50 53 55 58 60 63 65 93
Approx material [g] 6 7 7 8 9 9 10 10 11 12
Infill type Zig Zag
Infill denisty 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
3D Printing time [min] 46 49 51 54 56 59 61 64 66 93
Approx material [g] 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 10 11 12
Infill type Cross
Infill denisty 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
3D Printing time [min] 47 49 53 58 61 68 71 76 83 93
Approx material [g] 7 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 10 12
Infill type Cross 3D
Infill denisty 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
3D Printing time [min] 47 50 53 56 59 63 66 69 74 93
Approx material [g] 7 7 7 8 8 8 9 9 10 12
Infill type Gyroid
Infill denisty 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
3D Printing time [min] 47 49 53 56 63 67 72 78 83 93
Approx material [g] 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 10 11 12

Table 2. Infill patterns, 3D printing time and amount of material per specimen

Total of 130 specimens are 3D printed for testing. Each specimen was printed under the same conditions, with “flat”
printing orientation and 45˚ raster angle, shown on Fig. 5.

Fig. 5. 3D printing of dogbone-type specimen on Ultimaker 2+ 3D printer

After manufacturing, the tensile tests were carried out using a calibrated Shimadzu AGS-X machine, with a 100 kN
load cell. Specimens are tested according to ISO 527-2 standard, and with testing speed of 1 mm/min (Fig 6.)

Fig. 6. 3D printed specimens after testing on Shimadzu AGS-X machine according to ISO 627-2
 30TH DAAAM INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON INTELLIGENT MANUFACTURING AND AUTOMATION

Trapezium-X software is used for monitoring tensile properties results and drafting Stress-Strain diagrams (Fig 7.).
Results are collected and analyzed with statistic methods and presented in further text.

Fig. 7. Tensile testing and Stress-Strain diagram of Quarter Cubic specimen with 80% infill

3. Results and discussion

In this experiment total of 130 specimens of PLA material with different infill pattern and density are tested. Influence of
infill pattern and density on ultimate tensile strength (RM) and yield strength (R02) are tested, and all results are analysed
in excel and presented in this paper.

Fig. 8. Influence of infill pattern and density on RM and R02, “Grid” (left) and “Lines” (right) pattern

From Fig. 8.

Fig. 9. Influence of infill pattern and density on RM and R02, “Triangles” (left) and “Tri-Hexagon” (right) pattern
 30TH DAAAM INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON INTELLIGENT MANUFACTURING AND AUTOMATION

From Fig. 9. it can be seen that, for “Triangles” infill pattern, with increase in the infill density from 10% to 90%,
both ultimate tensile strength for 45% and yield strength for 44% are increased. Also, for “Tri-Hexagon” infill pattern,
both ultimate tensile strength for 48% and yield strength for 50% are increased.

Fig. 10. Influence of infill pattern and density on RM and R02, “Cubic” (left) and “Cubic Subdivision” (right) pattern

From Fig. 10. it can be seen that, for “Cubic” infill pattern, with increase in the infill density from 10% to 90%, both
ultimate tensile strength for 61% and yield strength for 63% are increased. Also, for “Cubic Subdivision” infill pattern,
both ultimate tensile strength for 45% and yield strength for 46% are increased.

Fig. 11. Influence of infill pattern and density on RM and R02, “Octet” (left) and “Quarter Cubic” (right) pattern

From Fig. 11. it can be seen that, for “Octet” infill pattern, with increase in the infill density from 10% to 90%, both
ultimate tensile strength for 73% and yield strength for 77% are increased. Also, for “Quarter Cubic” infill pattern, both
ultimate tensile strength for 61% and yield strength for 66% are increased.

Fig. 12. Influence of infill pattern and density on RM and R02, “Concentric” (left) and “Zig Zag” (right) pattern
 30TH DAAAM INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON INTELLIGENT MANUFACTURING AND AUTOMATION

From Fig. 12. it can be seen that, for “Concentric” infill pattern, with increase in the infill density from 10% to 90%,
both ultimate tensile strength for 96% and yield strength for 100% are increased. Also, for “Zig Zag” infill pattern, both
ultimate tensile strength for 33% and yield strength for 35% are increased.

Fig. 13. Influence of infill pattern and density on RM and R02, “Cross” (left) and “Cross 3D” (right) pattern

From Fig. 13. it can be seen that, for “Cross” infill pattern, with increase in the infill density from 10% to 90%, both
ultimate tensile strength for 7% and yield strength for 14% are increased. Also, for “Cross 3D” infill pattern, both ultimate
tensile strength for 20% and yield strength for 20% are increased.

Fig. 14. Influence of infill pattern and density on RM and R02, “Gyroid” pattern

From Fig. 14. it can be seen that, for “Gyroid” infill pattern, with increase in the infill density from 10% to 90%, both
ultimate tensile strength for 50% and yield strength for 64% are increased.
Maximum ultimate tensile strength and yield strength for every infill pattern is presented in Fig. 15.

Fig. 15. Maximum ultimate tensile strength (RM) and yield strength (R02) for every infill pattern
 30TH DAAAM INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON INTELLIGENT MANUFACTURING AND AUTOMATION

All infill patterns have maximum ultimate tensile strength and yield strength for 90% of infill (Fig. 15.). Results also
showed that with 100% infill, PLA material have 42,15 MPa of ultimate tensile strength and 36,40 MPa of yield strength.
If ultimate tensile and yield strength for all infill patterns with 90% infill are compared with 100% infill, it can be seen
that difference is about 40%. Also, the highest ultimate tensile strength and yield strength have “Concentric” infill pattern
with 90% of infill.

4. Conclusion

One of the advantages of 3D printing FDM technology is that the products can be manufactured with different infill
density. With this benefit, time and amount of material can be reduced and also costs of finished product.
After analysing the results obtained by tensile testing, it can be concluded that infill type and infill density have
influence on ultimate tensile strength and yield strength. As the density increases from 10% to 90%, the ultimate tensile
strength and yield strength also increases for every types of infill pattern. Maximum strength is with 90% of infill.
So, if product need maximum tensile properties, it have to be 3D printed with 100% infill. Also, if designer want to
save time and amount of 3D printed material, and decrease infill density from 100% to 90%, product of PLA material
will have reduced ultimate tensile strength and yield strength for 40%. As for most first prototypes, the maximum strength
of the product is not the most important, with those results mathematical model can me created, which can predict tensile
strength depending on infill pattern and density.
Also, results are showing that “Concentric” infill pattern gives the highest ultimate tensile strength and yield strength.
Comparing with 100% infill, with “Concentric” infill pattern of 90%, ultimate tensile strength is reduced for only 15%
and yield strength for 20%, and printing time is reduced for 30%.
In this paper, influence of infill pattern and density on material properties is examined only for tensile testing in one
direction, and for one printing orientation. In future examinations, other factor should be considered as different printing
orientation and testing in 3 directions. Also, influence of infill pattern and density on other mechanical properties
(bending, pressure, hardness, etc.) should be examined. And with all this results, better “picture” of material behaviour
with different infill pattern and density could be obtained, and that could be further used in FEM analyses.

5. References

[1] Pinero Vega D.; Batista Ponce M.; Valerga Pureta A. P.; Vazquez Martinez J. M. & Fernandez Vidal S. P. (2018).
A Comparison of Macro and Microgeometrical Properties of Specimens Made With a FDM Commercial Printer and
its Opensource Retrofit Version, Proceedings of 29th DAAAM International Symposium on Intelligent
Manufacturing and Automation, Zadar, ISSN 1726-9679, ISBN 978-3-902734-20-4, Katalinic B. (Ed.), pp.1108-
1115, Published by DAAAM International, Vienna, DOI: 10.2507/29th.daaam.proceedings.158
[2] Polak R.; Sedlacek F. & Raz K. (2017). Determination of FDM Printer Settings With Regard to Geometrical
Accuracy, Proceedings of 28th DAAAM International Symposium on Intelligent Manufacturing and Automation,
Zadar, ISSN 1726-9679, ISBN 978-3-902734-11-2, Katalinic B. (Ed.), pp.0561-0566, Published by DAAAM
International, Vienna, DOI: 10.2507/28th.daaam.proceedings.079
[3] Hajdarevic S.; Obucina M.; Mesic E. & Martinovic S. (2018). Stress and Strain of the Frontal Parallel Joints With
3D Printed Connectors, Proceedings of 29th DAAAM International Symposium on Intelligent Manufacturing and
Automation, Zadar, ISSN 1726-9679, ISBN 978-3-902734-20-4, Katalinic B. (Ed.), pp.0361-0368, Published by
DAAAM International, Vienna, DOI: 10.2507/29th.daaam.proceedings.052
[4] Farhad M. O.; TahseenFadhil A. & Hind B. A. (2018). Influence of Process Parameters on Mechanical Properties
and Printing Time of FDM PLA Printed Parts Using Design of Experiment. Journal of Engineering Research and
Applications, Vol. 8, No. 7, (July 2018) page numbers (65-69), ISSN: 2248-9622
[5] Baich L. (2016). Impact of Infill Design on Mechanical Strength and Production Cost in Material Extrusion Based
Additive Manufacturing, Master of Science in Engineering Thesis, Industrial and Systems Engineering Program,
Youngstown State Univeristy, Youngstown, Ohio – USA
[6] Farbman D. & McCoy C. (2016). Materials Testing of 3D Printed ABS and PLA Samples to Guide Mechanical
Design, Available from:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308709141_Materials_Testing_of_3D_Printed_ABS_and_PLA_Sample
s_to_Guide_Mechanical_Design Accessed: 2019-6-7
[7] Cekic A.; Begic-Hajdarevic D.; Muhamedagic K. & Guzanovic N. (2018). Experimental Investigations of Process
Parameters Influence on Dimensional Accuracy and Mechanical Properties of FDM Manufactured Parts,
Proceedings of 29th DAAAM International Symposium on Intelligent Manufacturing and Automation, Zadar, ISSN
1726-9679, ISBN 978-3-902734-20-4, Katalinic B. (Ed.), pp.0210-0214, Published by DAAAM International,
Vienna, DOI: 10.2507/29th.daaam.proceedings.030
[8] Fernandez-Vicente M.; Calle Wilson.; Ferrandiz S. & Conejero A. (2016). Effect of Infill Parameters on Tensile
Mechanical Behaviour in Desktop 3D Printing. 3D Printing and Additive Manufacturing, Vol. 3, No. 3, (September
2016) page numbers (183-192), ISSN: 2329-7662
 30TH DAAAM INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON INTELLIGENT MANUFACTURING AND AUTOMATION

[9] TahseenFadhil A.; Farhad M. O. & Hind B. A. (2017). Effect of Infill Parameter on Compression Property in FDM
Process. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications, Vol. 7, No. 10, (October 2017) page numbers (16-19),
ISSN: 2248-9622
[10] Alvarez K. L. C.; Lagos R. F. C. & Aizpun M. (2016). Investigating the Influence of Infill Percentage on the
mechanical Properties of Fused Deposition Modelled ABS Parts. Ingenieria e Investigacion, Vol. 36, No. 3,
(December 2016) page numbers (110-116), DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15446/ing.investig.v36n3.56610
[11] Akhoundi B. & Behravesh A. H. (2018), Effect of Filling Pattern on the Tensile and Flexural and Mechanical
Properties of FDM 3D Printed Products, Experimental Mechanics an International Journal, Vol. 11340, December
2018, ISSN 0014-4851
[12] Jap N. S. F.; Pearce G. M.; Hellier A. K.; Russell N.; Parr W. C. & Walsh W. R. (2019), The Effect of Raster
Orientation on the Static and Fatigue Properties of Filament Deposited ABS polymer, International Journal of
Fatigue, Vol. 124., July 2019, 328-337, ISSN 0142-1123
[13] Floor J. (2015). Getting a Grip on the Ultimaker 2 – Tensile Strength of 3D Printed PLA: A Systematic Investigation,
Delft University of Technology – Faculty of Industrial Design Engineering & Ultimaker B.V., 20151215

View publication stats